Every time I think I've finally decided between Bernie and Hilary once and for all, I start to waver again. (If you are strong for one or the other, feel free to try to convince me but know that once you sway me over to your side, I'll probably switch back 2 days later.)
The pundits keep talking about Hilary's auto bailout attack as being unfair or deceptive. To me, this issue is a microcosm that distills the central question for the choice on the Democratic side.
The stereotype about Bernie is that he is the Ted Cruz of the Dems: He won't compromise with anyone, even members of his own party. He lets the perfect be the enemy of the good. He was for the auto bailout as a standalone piece of legislation but he wasn't willing to make the hard compromise to actually vote in favor of the larger bill that eventually passed. (And P.S. that bill was supported by then President-elect Obama and it DID save the auto industry).
The stereotype about Hillary is that she is a politician who cuts deals and never stands on principle and doesn't have an authentic core. Hillary went along with the compromise legislation. Yes, it rewarded Wall Street criminals and made banks that were too-big-to-fail even bigger. But it also saved the economy including the auto industry.
It is not hyperbole to say that had everyone voted like Bernie, Congress simply would not have acted during an economic meltdown. Further, George Bush was still President at the time and wouldn't have signed any bill that was more progressive. I hated the Wall Street bail out. I still do. But the alternative was to do nothing and let the American economy collapse. Pardon the book plug, but governance is about making hard choices.
One of the big reasons I'm still undecided is that I'm not sure which style of leadership is needed more in this moment in history: Bernie the revolutionary, principled idealist or Hilary the incrementalist, deal-making pragmatist. I feel like they are two extremes on a spectrum. I wish each of them were a little bit more like the other.
